RESTRICTED  WORLD TRADE  
ORGANIZATION  G/SPS/R/44 
30 May 2007 
 (07-2223) 
Committee on Sanitary a nd Phytosanitary Measures  
  
 
SUMMARY OF THE MEETING OF 28 FEBRUARY – 1 MARCH 2007 
 
Note by the Secretariat
1 
 
Table of Contents  
 
Page  
I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA.............................................................................................3  
II. ACTIVITIES OF MEMBERS.................................................................................................3  
III. SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS ...........................................................................................5  
(a) New issues ..................................................................................................................... .............5  
(b) Issues previous ly raised ....................................................................................................... .......7  
(c) Concerns with commercial and private standards.......................................................................9  
(d) Consideration of specific notifications received.......................................................................13  
(e) Information on resolution of issues...........................................................................................1 5 
IV. OPERATION OF TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS........................................................16  
(a) Chairman's report on informal meeting ....................................................................................16  
V. IMPLEMENTATION OF SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT ................18  
(a) Chairman's report on informal meeting ....................................................................................18  
(b) Other matters relating to special  and differential treatment......................................................19  
VI. EQUIVALENCE – ARTICLE 4............................................................................................19  
(a) Information from Members on their experiences .....................................................................19  
(b) Information from relevant  observer organizations....................................................................19  
VII. PEST- OR DISEASE-FREE AREAS - ARTICLE 6 ...........................................................20  
(a) Chairman's report on the informal meeting on regionalization.................................................20  
(b) Information from Members on their experiences .....................................................................21  
(c) Information from relevant  observer organizations....................................................................21  
VIII.  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND COOPERATION .......................................................22  
(a) Information from the Secretariat............................................................................................... 22 
(b) Information from Members....................................................................................................... 23 
(c) Information from observers ..................................................................................................... .24 
                                                      
1 This document has been prepared under the Secret ariat's own responsibility and is without prejudice 
to the positions of Members or to their rights or obligations under the WTO. G/SPS/R/44 
Page 2  
 
  IX.
 MATTERS OF INTEREST ARISING FROM THE WORK OF OBSERVER 
ORGANIZATIONS ................................................................................................................24  
X. ISSUES ARISING FROM THE REVIEW OF THE OPERATION OF THE SPS AGREEMENT ...................................................................................................................... ..25
 
(a) Chairman's report.............................................................................................................. ........25  
XI. MONITORING OF THE USE OF INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS ...........................27  
XII. OBSERVERS – REQUESTS FOR OBSERVER STATUS ................................................27  
XIII.  ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON ........................................................................................27  
XIV.  OTHER BUSINESS................................................................................................................2 7 
XV. DATE  AND AGENDA FOR NEXT MEETING.................................................................29  
  G/SPS/R/44 
 Page 3 
 
 
  I. ADOPTION OF THE AGENDA 
1. The Committee on Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (the "Committee") held its thirty-
eighth meeting on 28 February – 1 March 2007.  The ag enda proposed for this meeting, circulated on 
16 February 2007 (WTO/AIR/2966), was adopted with amendments. 
II. ACTIVITIES OF MEMBERS 
China – Green Food Certification 
 
2. The representative of China provided information and publications rega rding the development 
of an accredited brand of organic or "green" food prod ucts.  He noted that China had great potential to 
produce high quality, safe products, and hence had developed its own system of certification, 
including trade mark supervision.  The certified pr oducts were monitored in accordance with relevant 
standards, and subject to strict processing contro ls and technical procedures.  The certification of 
"green" products was linked with production processes that extended from the farm to the consumers' 
table.  Products had to come from environmentally  friendly production areas, and be free of both 
environmental contamination and possible cont amination from production processes.  China's 
standards for organic products were at an advanced level, comparable to those of the Codex and other 
Members.  China's registered certification trad e mark had been submitted to eight countries for 
registration. 
Australia – IRA process 
 
3. The representative of Australia drew atten tion to notification G/SPS/N/AUS/203, regarding 
changes to Australia's import risk analysis (IRA) procedures.  The changes were designed to make the 
IRA process more transparent, efficient, predicta ble and timely, while strengthening its science-based 
approach.  New regulations would impose maximum tim eframes for IRAs, with standard IRAs to be 
completed within 24 months, and more complex IR As within 30 months.  These timeframes could be 
suspended only in clearly defined circumstanc es, such as if the authorities were waiting for 
information from an exporting country which was n ecessary to complete the IRA.  Procedures for 
responding to and prioritizing requests for import access would also be clarified and focused 
consultation with stakeholders woul d take place from early in the IRA process.  The details of the 
implementation of the new procedures would be reported to the SPS Committee, and much information was already available from the relevant  website (www.daff.gov.au).  The new procedures 
were expected to take effect in the first half of 2007. 
Chinese Taipei – certificates 
 
4. The representative of Chinese Taipei reported on ch anges in the formats of its veterinary and 
phytosanitary certificates (G/SPS/GEN/744 and Corr. 1).  These changes were made to ensure 
authenticity and to provide more information on the certificates; also the new certificates would be 
printed on anti-counterfeiting green paper with the bureau's logo.  As of 31 May 2007, only new 
certificates would be issued. 
United States – FDA ALERT initiative 
 
5. The representative of the United States provide d information and publications about a new 
public information initiative undertaken by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), to raise 
awareness of the need to protect the food supply from  contamination.  This was an outreach initiative, 
not a regulation, and should have no effect on trade.   There was an increased need to protect food 
from the threat of deliberate contamination.  ALERT is an acronym for Assure, Look, Employees, 
Reports, and Threat – actions that industry could ta ke to ensure food safety.  The focus was on G/SPS/R/44 
Page 4  
 
  everyday food safety behaviour and awareness, wi th suggestions on how to ensure the safety and 
security of facilities.  Information packets were av ailable in several languages, and there were also 
web-based training modules.  The representative of the United States further clarified that this 
initiative did not differentiate between accide ntal and intentional food contamination. 
6. The representative of the European Communities noted the similarities of this initiative with 
the EC rapid-alert system, however the EC syst em was a regulatory procedure to ensure that 
information was widely available regarding any in cidents.  The representative of the United States 
confirmed that her country would endeavour to alert trading partners immediately of any incidents.   
United States – Risk assessment on cloned animals 
 7. The representative of the United States repor ted that in December 2006, the US Food and 
Drug Administration (FDA) had issued three document s on the risks associated with animal cloning.  
These included a draft risk assessment, a proposed risk management plan and draft guidance for 
industry.  The release of these documents signalled the beginning of the FDA's interactions with the 
public and trading partners.  Until final decisions were made, producers were requested to withhold 
products from markets.  The draft risk assessment di d not address genetically engineered animals, but 
rather the potential risks to animal health from th e cloning process, as well as to human health from 
consuming animal products.  The risk management plan addressed both risks to animal health and 
potential uncertainties associated with feed and food from cloned animals.  The draft guidance to 
industry related to the use of clones and their offspring in food and feed and provides the FDA's current thinking on use of clones and their offspring in human food or animal feed.  FDA considered 
that whereas some cloned animals could be introdu ced into the food supply, insufficient information 
was available with regard to sheep clones for any de termination to be made at  this time. The FDA was 
soliciting comments on these documen ts before 3 April 2007. 
European Communities – Update of the Bluetongue situation 
 8. The representative of the European Comm unities stressed that Bluetongue was a non-
contagious, insect-borne disease, that did not affect  humans, and there was no risk of spreading the 
disease through milk or meat products.  The outbr eaks which had occurred in August 2006 in north-
western Europe were highly unusual, as that strain  of the virus had never before been reported in 
Europe.  The European Communities had taken measur es to minimize the impact of the outbreak, and 
control measures to eradicate the disease.  These ha d proven effective, as the  number of outbreaks 
had fallen sharply.  A harmonized monitoring and surveillance system had been established to ensure 
full transparency regarding the outbreaks.  The European Communities was disappointed that many 
countries had imposed import restrictions on live bovi nes, rather than applying the regionalization 
provisions of Article 6 of the SPS Agreement.   
Brazil – FMD situation 
 
9. The representative of Brazil reported on the cont rol and eradication activities in Mato Grosso 
do Sul and Parana.  Brazil had followed the internati onal guidelines with respect to the destruction of 
animals, introduction of sentinel animals, and investigation of the epidemiological data.  These all showed the efficacy of the control measures that had been taken, and in Parana, restrictions had been 
suspended.  Brazil had also complied with its oblig ations in international organizations and with 
trading partners regarding transparency.  In light of  this, Brazil expected its trading partners to avoid 
imposing unnecessary restrictions on trade.  Braz il was also actively seeking OIE recognition of the 
FMD-free status of other areas of the country.   G/SPS/R/44 
 Page 5 
 
 
  Paraguay – Information on various activities 
 
10. The representative of Paraguay reported on a number of SPS-related activities that had 
occurred in his country.  In December 2006, a new re gulation on the control of agricultural pesticides 
had been approved.  This regulation would provi de for a better evaluation of the properties of 
pesticides in order to guarantee their quality and e fficacy and to better protect human health and the 
environment.  Paraguay had also introduced a new regulation and a new standard on organic 
production processes.  In October 2006, a Presidential decree established that Stevia rebaudiana 
(bertoni) bertoni  – also known as sweet honey leaf – origin ated from Paraguay and was of agricultural 
interest.  The Joint WHO/FAO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) had agreed to evaluate 
the use of this plant as a natural sweetener at its meeting of June 2007.  The representative of 
Paraguay also reported that Australia had opened its market to soybeans for processing from Paraguay 
in January 2007.  Furthermore, in November 2006,  Argentina had given phytosanitary authorization 
for importation of fresh butternut squash (Cucúrbita moschata)  from Paraguay.   
11. The representative of Paraguay also reported that  the FMD situation in his country remained 
stable, and Paraguay was free of FMD with vaccinati on.  In 2006, vaccinati on had covered 99.5% of 
the cattle registered in the country.  He also informed the Committee about the construction in 
Paraguay of a biosecurity laboratory at Level 3 for ag riculture within the next 24 months.  Finally, he 
reported that Paraguay was in the process of developing a system for the traceability of meat products, to meet the requirements of international markets. 
Panama – Freedom from Mediterranean fruit flies 
 
12. The representative of Panama reported on a project  for the certification of fruit fly free areas 
in certain regions of his country (G/SPS/GEN/ 752).  Panama had been working since 2005 to 
establish the pest-free area, and extensive trapping  now showed the absence of Mediterranean fruit 
flies and had allowed the creation of a database, harmonized with that of the USDA Animal and Plant 
Health Inspection Service (APHIS).   
III. SPECIFIC TRADE CONCERNS 
(a) New issues 
China's import restrictions on products of animal origin due to dioxin – Concerns of the European 
Communities 
 13. The representative of the European Communities raised concerns regarding China's import 
restrictions on products of animal origin from some EC member States due to alleged dioxin 
contamination.  He recalled that there had been an isolated incident in January 2006, at which time all 
potentially contaminated products had quickly been recalled.  Trade had been re-established and EC 
exports had returned to normal within weeks, ex cept with China.  China was the only WTO Member 
that continued to impose restrictions because of a problem which no longer existed.  The European 
Communities had pursued bilateral contacts with  China's General Administration of Quality, 
Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine (AQSIQ) and provided all of the in formation requested by 
China.  The ban on products from some EC member  States was disproportionate to the potential risk, 
as the contamination problem no longer existed.  The representative of the European Communities 
requested China to remove its restrictions or to pr ovide a scientific justification for their maintenance. 
14. The representative of China confirmed that th is issue had been the focus of technical 
consultations with the European Communities.  In  Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands, this was 
the second time there had been this type of problem.  Given the fluidity of movement of goods within 
the European Communities, the spread of contamin ated products was very likely.  China was waiting G/SPS/R/44 
Page 6  
 
  to receive the final EC investigation report on the in cident so that it could complete its risk assessment 
and take the appropriate measure. 
Korea's measures related to access for beef products – Concerns of Canada 
 
15. The representative of Canada recalled that in r esponse to finding a case of BSE in Canada in 
May 2003, Korea had implemente d a ban on imports of beef fro m Canada.  Cana da had taken 
effective measures to control the risk of BSE, of ten exceeding OIE standards.  Furthermore, the OIE 
Terrestrial Animal Health Code indicates that no restrictions should be applied on boneless beef from 
animals aged 30 months or less, regardless of the BSE status of the exporting country.  More than 30 trading partners had resumed importing Canadian b eef, but Korea continued to block imports.  In 
January 2007, Canada had, under Article 5.8 of the SPS Agreement, formally requested Korea to 
provide a justification for this measure.  Canada was disappointed in Korea' s response, which was to 
request additional information.  On the basis of the information already provided to Korea, other 
trading partners had assessed risks and concluded that Canadian beef was safe to import.  The 
information has also been sufficien t for the OIE Central Bureau to determine Canada's BSE status.  
Canada requested Korea to lift its restrictions and grant access to Canadian beef according to the OIE 
guidelines. 
16. The representative of the European Communitie s indicated that they shared Canada's 
concerns and were facing similar problems with Kor ea.  This was not a new issue.  The European 
Communities strongly urged all Members to apply the OIE standards, especially with respect to BSE. 
17. The representative of Korea stated that impor t restrictions had been imposed on certain 
products due to the BSE outbreak in Canada.  His co untry had taken the necessary steps to permit the 
resumption of beef trade.  It was clear that under the terms of the SPS Agreement Korea could assess 
the risk from each Member individual ly.  The risk analysis on Canadian meat had been delayed when 
new BSE cases were reported in January 2006.  Kor ea was concerned that there might be a problem 
related to the effectiveness of the feed ban measu res, and the continued appearance of cases raised 
questions that had not been clearly answered by Canada.  However, in accordance with Article 5, 
Korea would continue to discuss this matter with Canada. 
18. The representative of Canada stressed that th e OIE Code allowed for trade in boneless beef 
from animals below 30 months regardless of the BSE status of the exporting country.  The few cases of BSE in cattle born after the feed ban had no epidemiological significance.  Although Canada was 
willing to provide any relevant information required, it had been unaware that there were any 
outstanding requests for information. 
Korea's failure to accept regionalization for bov ine and pig meat products – Concerns of Brazil 
 
19. The representative of Brazil raised concerns rega rding the lack of recognition of provisions on 
regionalization by Korea.  This raised serious doubts about the criteria used by Korea for its risk 
assessment and for establishing its appropriate level of protection (A LOP).  Despite various requests, 
the Korean Government never informed Brazil a bout the sanitary import requirements for beef and 
pig meat, but claimed that specific import conditions could not be established because Brazil was not free of FMD.  This requirement w as not in compliance with the OIE guidelines, nor with Articles 3, 5 
and 7 of the SPS Agreement.  The OIE did not establish different import requirements for meat from areas free from FMD whether with or without vaccination.  Brazil sought to export meat from a zone 
free of FMD without vaccination, but Korea refused to discuss this issue before FMD was eradicated 
from all of Brazil without vaccination.  Korea should provide the risk assessment which supported 
this measure, which did not conf orm to Article 6.  Brazil appr eciated the information on import 
procedures recently provided by Korea, but this  did not meet Brazil's request.  Korea required 
completion of a questionnaire and an on-site visit just to establish import requirements, whereas this  G/SPS/R/44 
 Page 7 
 
 
  was justified only in order to recognize disease-free stat us or evaluate veterinary services.  Although a 
Member could determine its ALOP, the measure take n must have a scientific justification and be 
based on a risk assessment.  It was also disappointin g that Korea appeared to not even recognize the 
concept of regionalization.  
20. The representative of Korea responded th at his country accepted the concept of 
regionalization as contained in Article. 6, based on  factors such as geography, etc, and this was 
included in Korea's import policy.  However, Korea  had not yet applied this policy with respect to 
FMD.  He recalled that Korea had experienced an FMD outbreak in 2002-2003, and had subsequently regained its status as FMD-free without vaccination at  great cost.  Because of this, Korea was very 
concerned about FMD and required suppliers to be free of FMD without vaccination.  FMD outbreaks 
in several areas of Brazil in 2005 and again in 20 06 led Korea to conclude that the FMD situation in 
Brazil was unstable, and that Brazil needed to estab lish FMD free zones through strict measures.  His 
authorities were ready to continue discussing this matter with Brazil at the expert level. 
(b) Issues previously raised 
Australia's import restrictions on New Zealand  apples – Concerns of New Zealand (no. 217– 
G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.7)  
 
21. The representative of New Zealand recalled that he  had first raised this issue in June 2005, 
and it concerned restrictions that had been in place  for over eight decades.  New Zealand's experience 
had been one of frustration;  since initiating a f ourth request for access in 1999, they had waited for 
over eight years for Australia to complete its import risk analysis (IRA) process.  While there had 
been some progress, the IRA had still not been completed before the end of 2006, as previously 
expected.  Now the IRA process was nearing comple tion, and a final IRA had been issued.    
However, the conditions outlined in final IRA were  extensive, and it was doubtful that commercially 
meaningful trade would be possible under these conditions.  The IRA proposed tougher requirements 
relating to fire blight, in contra diction to the conclusions of the Japan-Apples  case, and clearly in 
contradiction to Australia's WTO obligations.  Ther e was no scientific or legal justification for the 
imposition of these measures relating to fire blight.  Other proposed measures relating to other pests 
were also of concern, such as the requirement that  Australian inspectors be present in orchards.  New 
Zealand had demonstrated its willingness to work with Australia on this matter, and remained 
committed to resolving this issue.  However, if no progress was made in the near future, New Zealand 
could not rule out dispute settlement options. 
22. The representative of the United States noted that  her country also had an outstanding request 
for access to the Australian market for apples, and sh ared the concerns of New Zealand.  She recalled 
that Chile and the European Communities had also raised similar difficulties with Australia.  The 
major concern was fire blight, and the past disput e case found that stringent requirements, such as 
orchard inspections, were not justified.  Mature a pples do not pose a risk of spreading fire blight.  
Given the strength of the scientific and legal record s, she urged Australia to remove its unjustified 
import restrictions without delay. 
23. The representative of the European Communities observed that undue delays appeared to be a 
regular, most troublesome, feature of the Australia n IRA process.  He noted that the European 
Communities would address this concern in its comments on Australia's new IRA process.  
24. The representative of Australia reported that ther e had been a number of actions taken since 
the last meeting, and the issue w as close to finalization.  At the end of November 2006, Biosecurity 
Australia had released the final IRA report on apples from New Zealand.  Appeals from the final IRA report had been possible until 12 January 2007, on lim ited grounds.  There had been three appeals, but G/SPS/R/44 
Page 8  
 
  all had been dismissed.  The next step was fo r the Director of Quarantine to make a policy 
determination which would incl ude any import requirements. 
Indonesia's lack of recognition of pest-free ar eas – Concerns of the United States (no. 243– 
G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.7) 
 25. The representative of the United States provided an  update on concerns her country had first 
raised in October 2006 regarding In donesia’s Decree 37.  These c oncerns had been only partially 
resolved, but a complete resolution was within gr asp.  The measure affected US exports of 11 
horticultural products.  The United States considered  that Indonesia imposed excessive phytosanitary 
requirements in relation to pests that posed no phyt osanitary risks to Indon esia because they could not 
become established.   
26. The representative of Indonesia indicated that he had taken note regarding the arguments and 
scientific evidence presented and would follow- up on this matter with the United States. 
Israel’s lack of phytosanitary import legislation – Concerns of the European Communities (no. 233 - 
G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.7) 
 
27. The representative of the European Communities not ed that Israel's lack of phytosanitary 
legislation lead to uncertainty and unpredictability  regarding the steps to be followed when exported 
products reached the market.  He acknowledged that  Israel had taken some actions to increase 
transparency by publishing some import requireme nts on the internet, and recognized that internal 
legislative procedure had to be followed.  However, it appeared that the legislation was still at a draft 
stage, and the European Communities requested Israel to finalize its le gislation in accordance with the 
IPPC standards. 
28. The representative of Israel expressed regret that  this issue had been raised again despite 
bilateral discussions with the European Communities.  He noted that the title of this agenda item was 
not appropriate as Israel had legislation on SPS requirements for imports.  The European 
Communities concern related to the level of specificity  of that legislation.  Israel understood the need 
for predictability and was making great efforts in th is regard.  The Ministries of Agriculture, Finance 
and Justice were involved in the work.  The Ministry  of Justice had completed work on a draft, which 
had been sent to the Ministry of Agriculture for fi nal comments.  The final draft would be sent to the 
Economic and Finance committees before its final a pproval.  There was no timeframe established for 
the adoption of the legislation, however the representa tive of Israel insisted that this did not create a 
hindrance to the trade of the European Communities or any other trading partners as trade continued 
to take place normally. 
BSE-related import restrictions by certain Member s – Concerns of the United States (no. 193 – 
G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.7) 
 29. The representative of the United States expressed concern that US ruminant and non-ruminant 
products continued to face BSE-related restricti ons.  Although there had been some progress and a 
number of Members had removed measures, US pr oducts continued to face overly restrictive 
measures which exceeded the OIE standards.  The United States had undertaken extensive 
surveillance and put in place interlocking safeguards, nonetheless many restrictions remained in place.  
The representative of the United States asked Member s to review the evidence now available and to 
revise their requirements accordingly.  G/SPS/R/44 
 Page 9 
 
 
  Indonesia’s legislation on importation of live anima ls and meat products – Concerns of Brazil (no. 
244– G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.7) 
 
30. The representative of Brazil indicated his c ountry’s concerns with Indonesia’s lack of 
recognition of regionalization.  Indonesia had indi cated that its legislation was under revision, and 
was being harmonized with the OIE standards and SPS requirements, as notified in G/SPS/N/ IDN/30.  
However, Brazil’s analysis of the revision conc luded that Indonesia still would not recognize 
regionalization for FMD and other animal diseases.  Brazil had raised its complaint in October 2006, 
before the end of the comment period provided, but Indonesia's Enquiry Point had never provided 
answers to the issues raised.  Brazil urged Indonesia to ensure the full application of Article 6 of the 
SPS Agreement and the OIE standards for zoning.  The establishment of national protection levels 
and measures must be based on risk assessment s, in accordance with the SPS Agreement.   
31. The representative of Indonesia recalled that FMD was a very sensitive matter for Indonesia, 
due to its climate and the outbreak that had occurred five years ago.  Article 3.3 of the SPS Agreement 
permitted Members to impose requirements that went  beyond the international standards.  Indonesia 
had to apply a maximum standard in this case, a nd this would be applied until exporting countries had 
been declared FMD free by the OIE.  Indonesia was looking to continuing consultations with Brazil on this issue.  
EC restrictions on US poultry exports – Concerns of the United States  (no. 242 – 
G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.7) 
 32. The representative of the United States recalled that the European Communities continued to 
restrict US poultry because of the use of anti-micr obial treatments and washes, despite a positive risk 
assessment by the European Food Safety Agency (EFSA).  The European Commission had drafted 
legislation to allow the use of these products on poultry, but they had not yet been authorized. 
33. The representative of the European Communities responded that the EC market was open to 
imports of poultry meat, and substantial quantiti es were imported from Brazil and Thailand.  The 
European Communities was also open for US exports, but had difficulties with the US insistence on 
the use of anti-microbial treatments (AMTs).  The US  poultry industry worked to high standards, but 
refused to export poultry that had not been treated with AMTs.  One solution would be for the United 
States to change its system and export without AMTs , which it refused to do.  The other solution was 
for the European Communities to adapt its system , which was very sensitive because these products 
were banned for use in Europe.  The use of AMTs was very controversial with EC member States and 
consumers, who considered these products unnecessary  if appropriate hygiene was used from farm to 
table.  The European Communities had taken constr uctive steps and adopted framework legislation to 
allow for possible authorization of AMTs.  EFSA had evaluated their safety, and discussions were 
underway with member States to develop implementing legislation to allow their use.   
(c) Concerns with commercial and private standards  
34. The Chairman recalled that in October 2006, the Secretariat had organized an informal 
information session at which EurepGAP and UNC TAD provided information regarding commercial 
and private standards.  A number of Members had requested that the Committe e specifically consider 
this issue as part of its agenda for this meeti ng.  A number of documents on this issue had been 
distributed, including a background document by th e Secretariat (G/SPS/GEN/746), documents by St. 
Vincent and the Grenadines (G/SPS/GEN/766) a nd the Bahamas (G/SPS/GEN/764), as well as by the 
International Organization for Standard ization (ISO)(G/SPS/GEN/750), by UNCTAD 
(G/SPS/GEN/760 and 761) and by OECD (G/SPS/GEN/ 763).  He also noted that the Chairman of 
EurepGAP had indicated his willingness to meet w ith any Member regarding the EurepGAP scheme. G/SPS/R/44 
Page 10  
 
  35. In introducing the background document (G/SPS/GEN/746), the Secretariat stressed that this 
did not provide an exhaustive analysis.  The first part of the document provided information regarding 
private standards and their nature.  The document dr ew attention to the fact that there were over 400 
such schemes, according to UNCTAD, and identifie d what could be some of the reasons for the 
proliferation of private standards.  Among these reas ons was the growing attention to corporate social 
responsibility, along with company concerns of saf eguarding their reputations.  The document also 
gave examples of private standards and highli ghted the diversity of schemes, which included 
individual schemes, collective schemes, schemes that focu ssed at the farm gate level, others that were  
business-to-business.  One difficulty for exporters wa s to know what schemes they needed to comply 
with.  While there was a trend towards benchm arking, it was important to understand that 
benchmarking was not the same as the concept of equivalence referred to in the SPS Agreement.  
Another concern was that although private standa rds were not formally mandatory, due to the 
concentration in food retailing, the schemes could in practice take on a mandatory nature.  There was 
also some blurring of the distinction between private voluntary standards and official requirements.   
36. The Secretariat noted that the second part of the background document addressed some of the 
trade issues relating to private standards.  Some  concerns had been raised in the SPS Committee as 
specific trade concerns.  Another area of concern rela ted to the costs of compliance, in particular the 
costs of meeting multiple standards for different mark ets.  The paper noted that private schemes could 
also have trade creation effects, but the ava ilable literature focused primarily on compliance 
difficulties.  The document next considered the relationship of private standards with the SPS 
Agreement.  It did not purport to provide any le gal interpretation, but only to identify issues for 
consideration, such as the possible link to Article  13.  There might also be links to the TBT 
Agreement, in particular the Code of Practice for the Preparation, Adoption and Application of 
Standards.  The  final section of the document iden tified some issues for possible consideration by the 
SPS Committee, such as the relationship between priv ate standards and the Codex Alimentarius;  the 
relationship with OIE in particular regarding anim al welfare;  what constituted a reasonable measure 
under Article 13;  examination of the possible relations hip of private standards with other agreements;  
and the issues of  benchmarking and equivalence. 
37. The representative of St. Vincent and the Gren adines welcomed the Secretariat's document 
which showed the complexity and challenges of the issue.  St. Vincent was a traditional supplier of 
certain agricultural products to the European Comm unities, and recently its exporters had begun to 
suffer adverse effects from pr ivate standards requirements, including GAP, traceability and 
environmental concerns (G/SPS/GEN/766).  Privat e standards were proliferating without any 
consultation with the recognized standard-setting bodies or with national authorities.  This was of serious concern to small and vulnerable economies, and contrary to the spirit of the SPS Agreement.  
The proliferation of private standards also created confusion and a lack of transparency.  A number of studies had shown that these standards marginalized small farmers and resulted in  increased rural 
poverty.  One problem was the lack of objectivity of auditing systems, as different auditors had 
different interpretations.  For example, what some a uditors considered to be a pesticide, others did 
not.  In the case of St. Vincent and the Grenadines,  the costs related to these different requirements 
accounted for over US$3 million.  Another constraint was that the conditions of production on sloping 
lands resulted in a marked increase in the cost of production and a lack of competitiveness for 
products from St. Vincent and the Grenadines.  To address these concerns, the representative 
suggested that consideration be given to crea ting support facilities, specific to each countries' 
situation;  ensure the involvement of producers in developing the standards;  and ensure their 
compliance with the SPS Agreement. 
38. The observer from the Bahamas noted that his country had experience primarily with hotels 
and companies using their own private standards.   Those producers able to comply with these 
requirements benefited from a more privileged market access, despite the fact that the additional costs  G/SPS/R/44 
 Page 11 
 
 
  were not compensated through higher prices.  More  details on the Bahamas' experience was provided 
in document G/SPS/GEN/764. 
39. The representative of UNCTAD  drew attention to the background paper summarizing 
experiences identified in UNCTAD's case studies (G /SPS/GEN/761).  The results of the studies in 
Africa would be published shortly following a wo rkshop on Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) 
organized jointly with FAO in cooperation with the Ke nyan authorities.  He note d that to date special 
attention had been given to EurepGAP, due to its coverage, and the possibilities for adjustments.  The 
benchmarking provided under Eurep GAP could contribute to harmonization.  The UNCTAD studies 
had focussed on the development aspects of private standards.  However, two issues that had been 
examined were linked to the SPS Agreement, th ese were transparency in standard-setting and 
equivalence.  UNCTAD had not looked at the link to governmental requirements, although some 
argued that governmental and private requirements were mutually supportive, as the governmental 
requirements focussed on outcomes while the pr ivate sector standards focussed on production 
processes. 
40. The representative of UNCTAD suggested that national GAP schemes in developing 
countries could play a key role in assisting producers to adjust to the requirements of export markets, 
particularly if they focussed on small producers.  He  further suggested that governments could take a 
proactive role in the development of GAP requirement s, including in the areas of  conceptual analysis;  
facilitation of investment in hard and soft infr astructure;  supportive policies such as on financial 
services;  ensuring policy coherence;  and facilitating stakeholder dialogue. 
41. The representative of UNCTAD further noted th e changes in private standards over time, 
such as the EurepGAP standard-se tting process becoming more transparent.  In Prague 2006, for the 
first time, proposed changes were presented in a participatory approach.  However, developing 
countries still faced difficulties in effectively partic ipating in this process, and national EurepGAP 
working groups existed in only five countries.  He noted that Chile had succeeded in having its 
national GAP scheme benchmarked against othe rs.  Benchmarking was not an easy process, 
especially for developing countries, and its interpreta tion of equivalence of measures was stricter than 
under the SPS Agreement.  This latter consid ered the equivalence of outcomes whereas the 
EurepGAP benchmarking depended on the equivalence of processes.  Benchmarking was easier between two private sector schemes than with gove rnment requirements or schemes.  Finally, the 
representative of UNCTAD noted that the studies indi cated that large producers managed to achieve 
certification when necessary, however small-scale pr oducers faced serious difficulties.  Reliance on 
donor funds, including from NGOs, could create unwanted dependence, yet it was difficult for 
smallholders to meet the costs of certification wit hout financial assistance.  This raised questions 
about their ability to participate in inte rnational trade in agricultural products. 
42. The representative of ISO stated that he had al so provided a document on private standards to 
the TBT Committee during its second triennial review (see G/TBT/7).  The TBT Committee had 
noted that difficulties could arise and had identifie d six elements in this regard.  However, the 
situation with respect to the SPS Agreement was di fferent as it had a specific reference to standards 
developed by Codex, IPPC and OIE.  The work of the ISO also supported the work of these organizations.  ISO was elaborating a paper on the use of ISO standards in the regulatory work of 
other bodies.  
43. The representative of the OECD indicated that her organization's work on private standards 
focussed on why these had arisen, and what effect they might have on the access of developing 
country exports to OECD-type countries.  The move from producing for the local markets to international markets provided opportunities for ch anging product mix and m oving to non-traditional 
products, as had happened in Kenya with green bean s, and with asparagus in Peru.  Supermarket 
chains were increasingly building on their reputations, and were often frustrated with the slow pace of G/SPS/R/44 
Page 12  
 
  development of governmental regul ations.  Governments often focussed on what was the minimum 
needed, and recognized that the priority of consum ers was food safety.  However the private standards 
went beyond safety, and the trend was to include a wider scope of issues such as labour issues, child 
labour issues, etc.  The result was that private sta ndards were often a barrier for small-scale growers.  
The commercial reality of small-scale production, coupled with weak infr astructure, illiteracy, and 
other constraints meant that the costs of meeting private standards excluded small-scale producers 
from the global chain.  As commercial demands were likely to become more im portant, perhaps there 
was a need to consider consolidation of production,  to ensure greater employment and the ability to 
fulfil the required production processes.  Although the commercial demands were costly, they also 
provided an opportunity for learning, perhaps first by focussing on regional markets.  As the case 
studies of Chile and Peru demonstrated, th ere was a need for producers to adapt. 
44. The representative of Bolivia, sp eaking also on behalf of Ecuador and Peru, noted concerns 
that private standards were becoming trade barriers.  He questioned the scientific basis for the private 
standards, and recalled the requirement for SPS m easures to be based on ri sk assessments.  The 
private standards also failed to take account of the transparency requirements of Article 7, or of the 
needs of developing countries.  He stressed the need for the Committee to follow and monitor these 
developments.  The representative of the Dominica n Republic agreed that private standards were a 
serious concern, as had been noted by St. Vincent and the Grenadines with respect to bananas.  The 
representative of Costa Rica suggested that the Co mmittee maintain this issue on its agenda, and 
invited Members to provide inform ation regarding their experiences. 
45. The representative of Argentina indicated that there was a need both to assess the impact of 
private standards on developing countries as well as their relation to the SPS Agreement.  Although 
these standards were not adopted by governments and were not obligatory, their effects were similar 
to those of governmental measures. 
46. The representative of Egypt noted that there w as both a trade aspect and a legal aspect to the 
issue.  The legal issue was the relationship of priv ate standards to the SPS Agreement.  Of practical 
concern was how to ensure the participation of de veloping country exporters in the development of 
private standards.  In practice, these standards were  virtually mandatory and ha d the effect of making 
it impossible for small farmers to compete for market shares.  The common framework presented in the OECD paper was particularly useful in decidi ng how to address the issue.  He supported Costa 
Rica's suggestion that developing country Members share their experiences with private standards in 
the Committee. 
47. The representative of Chile observed that there were commercial, legal and also technical 
aspects of private standards.  Article 1 of the SPS Agreement did not differentiate between private standards and other SPS measures.  Article 13 gave governments responsibility over private standards.  
Equivalence under the SPS Agreement permitted also the recognition of systems.  In reality, private 
standards could provide opportunities, but there w as a need for cooperation.  Codex was working on 
the issue in cooperation with ISO and OECD, so as to avoid duplication. 
48. The representative of the European Communiti es expressed the concern that as attention 
focussed on private standards, Members might lose si ght of official standards.  Private standards 
presented an obstacle only in cases where the exporte r already met official standards and had access 
on that basis.  The primary concern was to meet na tional standards.  Private standards were significant 
trade barriers also in intra-EC trade.  There were, however, some trade creating aspects to these 
standards, as European consumers were willing to  pay high prices for products they wanted.  One 
example was asparagus from Peru.  Without some lega l clarity regarding the interpretation of Article 
13, it would be difficult for the Comm ittee to make progress on this issue.  G/SPS/R/44 
 Page 13 
 
 
  49. The representative of Cuba acknowledged that private standards had a trade creation 
potential, but could also be trade barriers.  She noted that the negotiators of the SPS Agreement had 
probably not foreseen the development of such stan dards, which made interpretation of Article 13 
difficult.  The TBT Code of Good Practice provide d a clearer link. with private standards.  She 
welcomed continued consideration of this issue by the Committee. 
50. The representative of Brazil suggested that although the SPS Committee should primarily 
focus on official standards, if private standards created trade problems Members should be able to 
raise their concerns in the Comm ittee.  Private standards affected market competition and quality 
requirements, whereas government standards should pr evail with respect to health issues.  With 
reference to the UNCTAD paper, he clarified th at the Brazilian GAP scheme for fruits was designed 
for national producers, not to meet international private standards. 
51. The representative of Peru stressed that privat e standards went beyond national requirements.  
Despite the positive experience with asparagus and EurepGAP, it was difficult for developing country 
exporters to keep up-to-speed with private standa rds.  There was a need for harmonization also among 
private standards.   
52. The Chairman noted the critical importance of defining whether private standards were SPS 
measures, or whether they fell within the scope of  the TBT Agreement.  The TBT Agreement covered 
private standards, but this was not clear in the SPS Agreement.  He proposed that the Committee keep 
the issue on its agenda for the next meeting, and suggested that the Secretariat consider organizing 
another informal information session in the margin s of the next Committee meeting, to which the 
Secretary of the TBT Committee and private standards bodies might be invited. 
(d) Consideration of specific notifications received 
G/SPS/N/AUS/203 –Reform of  Australia's IRA process – Concerns of the European Communities 
 
53. The representative of the European Communities we lcomed Australia's proposed reform of its 
import risk analysis (IRA) process, and in particular the establishment of maximum timeframes for 
completion of IRAs.  He noted, however, that it was unclear what circumstances, if any, could permit 
the extension or suspension of the timeframes.  Ho w could trading partners be assured that the clock 
would not be stopped for unjustifiable reasons ?  The European Communities welcomed the 
establishment of the eminent scientists group, and e xpressed the hope that this would ensure that all 
scientific opinions were fully taken into account.   
54. The representative of the Philippi nes shared the concerns of the European Communities, as 
the new process provided flexibility and allowed for the suspension of the timeframes.  He sought 
clarifications on what regulations under the Quarantin e Act might be modified, and the effect of the 
new process on pending requests for IRAs.  In partic ular, he questioned whet her pending IRAs would 
be subject to review by the eminent scientists gr oup, and what would be the composition of this 
group.   
55. The representative of Australia clarified that pe nding IRAs that were well-advanced would be 
finalized under the current rules.  Australia would announce the transitional arrangements, other 
existing market access requests, and their prioritiza tion.  Australia would also clearly define the 
criteria for suspending the prescribed timeframes (" stopping the clock") - this would not be for 
unjustifiable reasons.  However, the possibility of  stopping the clock was necessary in light of 
experience and reflected the practical circumstances in completing risk assessments – for example, the 
need to wait for information to be provided by an  applicant country.  The details of the procedures 
would be publicized, and Australia would inform the Committee once the new procedures were in 
place. G/SPS/R/44 
Page 14  
 
  G/SPS/N/AUS/204 – Australia's revised generic I RA for prawns and prawn products – Concerns of 
Thailand 
 
56. The representative of Thailand expressed serious concerns about the revised draft generic 
import analysis report on prawns and prawn products as notified by Australia.  The proposed changes 
would have serious implications for the export of these products.  Thailand had submitted its 
comments in response to the Australian notification a nd was in particular concerned that there was no 
scientific justification for the proposed quarantin e measures.  The analytical methods employed 
suffered from a lack of empirical data, and the co nclusions were not based on scientific data but 
tailored to fit the views of policymakers.  Tha iland considered that these measures were unnecessary 
and would create trade obstacles for its exports. 
57. The representative of Thailand recalled that this was not a new issue, as a first draft IRA had 
been notified by Australia in November 2000 (G/ SPS/N/AUS/124).  Shortly after, however, Australia 
imposed interim measures in response to an outbr eak of exotic White Spot Syndrome Virus and 
Yellow head Virus.  The interims  measure were notified in February 2001 (G/SPS/N/AUS/126).  The 
disease outbreak was apparently related to far more imported prawns being used as fishing bait than 
foreseen, in violation of Australia's domestic legislat ion.  But it was foreign exporters who had to pay 
the price of this domestic problem.  Since that ti me, Thailand had regularly raised its concerns at 
meetings of the SPS Committee and in other fora.  Thailand was concerned that the most recent draft 
report would result in another prolongation of unnecessarily stringent interim measures, without 
sufficient scientific evidence.  Th is more than 6-year delay in completing the IRA was an undue 
delay.  If the measure were indeed a provisional measure, it should have been reviewed within a 
reasonable time, and the nature of the emergenc y requiring the imposition of urgent measures should 
have been described.  Thailand re quested that the interim measure be revoked, and that a new draft 
IRA be concluded within a reasona ble period of time, fully taking into account Thailand's comments 
and suggested alternative measures to mitigate the risks. 
58. The representative of China shared the concerns  expressed by Thailand.  China considered 
that the proposed measures were more strict th an necessary.  For exampl e, the measure permitted 
imports only from regions free from certain diseases, but those same prawn disease existed also in Australia.  Australia had imported prawns from Asia for ten years with no evidence that the disease 
had been spread through trade.  This could not be justified as an emergency situation.  Furthermore, 
there was no justification for requiring the removal of  shells, as there was no scientific evidence that 
they carried diseases.  This was an extra burden on exporters and not consiste nt with the practice of 
selling the product domestically with shells.  The pr oposed measure would require the testing of all 
imports for three diseases, although they posed no risk  to human health and there was little risk of the 
prawns being thrown into Australian waters.  Fina lly, China considered the requirement that imported 
prawns must be heated to 85 degrees would re duce marketability and that alternatives should be 
provided.  The proposed measures did not have a scientific justification and would cause unnecessary 
obstacles to trade. 
59. The representatives of Indonesia, Malaysia, the Ph ilippines and Sri Lanka indicated that they 
shared the concerns of Thailand and China.  
60. The representative of Australia responded that the revised draft IRA had been issued in 
November 2006, with a 90-day comment period (clo sing in February 2007) which had allowed all 
stakeholders an extended opportunity to provide thei r views.  The IRA team was now considering the 
comments received.  The draft IRA reflected a comprehensive review of the current science, and had concluded that there was a need to strengthen impor t measures through stricter controls, but a final 
decision about the necessary measures had not yet b een made.  Australia firmly rejected any 
suggestion that the revised draft IRA had relied on s ubjective assessments or that its findings had been 
pre-determined.  After the IRA team  had considered all stakeholders comments, the revised draft IRA  G/SPS/R/44 
 Page 15 
 
 
  would be considered by an emin ent scientists group, and the IRA team would issue the final IRA 
report. 
(e) Information on resolution of issues 
Panama - Import licences for agricultural prod ucts (no. 118, G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.7) 
  61. The representative of Canada indicated that  they considered specific trade concern 
number 118, resolved.  Canada had previously been concerned that the issuan ce of SPS-re lated import 
licenses was being hindered for non-SPS reasons, howev er that concern had been resolved through a 
bilateral discussion.  Panama confirmed that the issue had been resolved and stressed their objective 
of smoother trade relations. 
United States - Import restrictions on potted pl ants from the European Communities (no. 102,  
G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.7) 
 
62. The representative of the European Communities recalled that they had previously reported 
that their concerns regarding US measures on plan ts and growing media had been resolved as the 
United States had indicated that it would publish a final rule which addressed these concerns.  
Unfortunately, one EC member State continued to f ace difficulties in exporting to the United States.  
The European Communities therefore considered th at, for the time being, this issue was again 
unresolved. 
Panama -Inspection regime for agricultural products (no. 226,  G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.7 
 
63. The representative of Panama recalled that Costa Rica had raised specific concerns regarding 
Panama's inspection regime, in particular with re gard to dulce de leche and tomatoes, as detailed in 
document G/SPS/GEN/582.  Following a number of bila teral meetings, in October 2006 Costa Rican 
officials had issued a communication indicating the resolution of these issues.  The representative of 
Costa Rica indicated that he was not at this time able to confirm the resolution of this specific trade 
concern.  
European Communities – Application and modification of EC Regulat ion on novel foods (no. 238, 
G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.7) 
 
64. The representative of Peru noted that although hi s country had not requested that this issue be 
on the agenda for this meeting, he would welc ome an update from the European Communities on 
current developments.  The representative of th e European Communities indicated that the Novel 
Foods Regulation was being revised.  It had initiall y been designed to cover a full range of novel 
foods, from GMO foods to products of biological diversity.  Following public consultations and the 
consideration of the views and comments received , revised legislation was being prepared.  He 
anticipated that the result would be a two-tiered pr ocess, with products that had a long history of safe 
use subjected to less rigorous procedures than ot her novel foods.  The European Communities was 
looking to address the concerns identified by tr ading partners, while ensuring consumer safety. 
Revision 7 of G/SPS/GEN/204 
 
65. The Secretariat drew attention to the most r ecent revision of the catalogue of specific trade 
concerns (G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.7 and addenda).  The fi rst part of the document provided an overview 
and listed all specific trade con cerns since 1995.  Ten new issues had been raised in 2006.  
Addendum 1 of the document summarized all issues that had been discussed in 2006, including those 
where a resolution had been reported during 2006.  Addendum 2 included all issues where there had 
been no discussion during 2006, and for which no  resolution had been reported.  Addendum 3 G/SPS/R/44 
Page 16  
 
  included all issues on which a resolution had been repor ted prior to 2006.  The Secretariat encouraged 
Members to make reference to the unique identifyi ng number for specific trade concerns when they 
requested that these be included on the agenda of meetings of the SPS Committee, to avoid confusion 
if the same concerns was referred to in a different manner. 
Horizontal mechanism to resolve conc erns relating to non-tariff barriers 
 
66. The Secretariat recalled that it had previously brought to the attention of the Committee 
discussions taking place in the context of the Non- Agricultural Market Access (NAMA) negotiations 
on proposals to establish a mechanism to resolve tr ade concerns related to non-tariff barriers.  
Proposals had been tabled by the European Co mmunities as well as by a group of eleven other 
Members.  The proposals would create a 60-day procedure whereby a facilitator would assist in 
finding a technical resolution to the trade problem, without consideration of the WTO consistency of 
the measure at issue.  At a meeting at the end of January, the proponents had provided responses to questions that had been raised earlier regarding the op eration of this so-called horizontal mechanism.  
Discussions were expected to continue in the context of the NAMA negotiations. 
IV. OPERATION OF TRANSPARENCY PROVISIONS 
67. The Chairman drew attention to the most recent list of national notification authorities 
contained in G/SPS/NNA/11;  the most recent list of national enquiry points contained in 
G/SPS/ENQ/21;  and updated information on which Me mbers had notified an Enquiry Point and/or a 
Notification Authority in G/SPS/GEN/27/Rev.16.  The notifications received since the last meeting of 
the SPS Committee were summarized, on a monthly basis, in G/SPS/GEN/741, G/SPS/GEN/743, 
G/SPS/GEN/745 and G/SPS/GEN/749.  All SPS documents submitted by Members, Observers and 
the Secretariat in 2006 were listed in document G/SPS/GEN/755.   
(a) Chairman's report on informal meeting 
68. The Chairman reported that at the informal m eeting held on 27 February , he had recalled that 
the SPS Committee would hold its third special meeting on transparency provisions in October 2007.  
During its meeting in October 2006, the Committ ee had asked the Secretariat to circulate a 
questionnaire on the operation of Enquiry Points a nd National Notification Authorities, in order to 
help prepare for the special meeting.  Subsequent ly, the Secretariat had distributed a questionnaire 
(G/SPS/W/103/Rev.2) and prepared an analysis of the replies received for discussion at the informal 
meeting (G/SPS/GEN/751). 
69. Following a brief presentation by the Secretariat of  the issues that stood out in the replies to 
the questionnaire, the Committee had agreed that the more than 50 individual replies, which had not 
been circulated as separate documents, be made ac cessible on the Internet, through the SPS page of 
the Members' website.  The Secretariat had clarified that the geographical groupings and their ordering in the Secretariat Note were based on those in the WTO's Annual Report.  In addition, due to 
a formatting error, the Asian regions had not been listed in the legend of Figure 2 although the chart 
itself showed that replies had been received from all regions of the world. 
70. Some Members had reiterated the usefulness of notifying all new or changed measures 
whether or not they were substantially the same as  an international standard.  All new or changed 
measures could have an impact on trade.  In additi on, it was not always possible to determine to what 
extent a new measure followed or deviated from an international standard.  Moreover, such a practice 
would assist in the Committee's task of monitoring the process of international harmonization as 
stipulated in Article 12.4 of the SPS Agreement.  However, a number of other Members had raised 
concerns, on the one hand, about the already unmana geable volume of notifications and on the other 
hand, about the need for a large number of Members to first comply with existing notification  G/SPS/R/44 
 Page 17 
 
 
  obligations in the Agreement.  The Secretaria t had indicated that very few Members actually 
completed the section of the notification format which referred to international standards and 
described of how the notified measures deviated from the relevant standard. 
71. One Member had welcomed the increasing number of notifications from developing countries 
and referred to its technical assistance activities with Enquiry Points an d National Notification 
Authorities of developing countries.  Another Member had indicated that those Members which 
traded more also had more measures in place which affected international trade.  If a Member failed to notify a measure affecting trade, it would be no ticed and the Member would be vulnerable in any 
litigation.  Therefore, they were not necessarily con cerned with the lack of notifications from certain 
Members. 
72. A number of Members had touched upon three main questions which could be addressed 
during the special meeting on transparency:  what to notify, how to notify, and what to do with 
notifications received.  This letter included screeni ng notifications, forwarding them to the relevant 
stakeholders and preparing comments on them.   
73. Other questions highlighted included:  
- how to train and maintain qualified staff; 
- how to secure consistent funding for e ffective operation of an Enquiry Point; 
- how to ensure effective coordination and communication, domestically and at the 
international level; 
- how to improve communication among WTO E nquiry Points and the contact points 
of the three relevant standard-setting organizations; 
- how to improve the quality of  notifications submitted, 
- how to ensure the commitment of relevant  actors in the transparency process, which 
could be more vital than extensive resources; 
- how to learn from experiences of other Members; 
- how to benefit from regi onal coordination;  and 
- how to devise relevant technical assistan ce programs to improve implementation of 
the transparency provisions. 
74. The Secretariat had reported that the SPS In formation Management System would be 
presented to the SPS Committee during the special m eeting on transparency in October 2007.  The 
System would offer advanced search and reporti ng possibilities for Members, for example according 
to HS codes or keywords, such as ISPM 15 or GMOs.  Still, its usefulness would depend on the 
quality and extent of information provi ded in the notifications themselves. 
75. The Committee had agreed to hold another inform al meeting in June to consider a draft 
programme for the October transparency meeting, to  be prepared by the Secretariat, as well as any 
specific proposals or national experiences that Me mbers wished to communicate to the Committee. 
Members were invited to ensure that the contact information for their Enquiry Points and National 
Notification Authorities available to the Secretaria t were correct, as these would be used for the 
invitation to the special meeting. 
76.
 Following the Chairman's report on the informal  meeting, the Secretariat invited Members 
who had not yet responded to the questionnaire re garding the implementation of the transparency 
provisions of the Agreement to do so before the end of March, to enable the Secretariat to revise the G/SPS/R/44 
Page 18  
 
  summary document in advance of the next informal m eeting.  The Secretariat also agreed to circulate 
the proposed draft programme for the special meeting in October in advance of the June meeting, for 
consideration by Members. 
V. IMPLEMENTATION OF SPECIAL AND DIFFERENTIAL TREATMENT 
(a) Chairman's report on informal meeting 
77. The Chairman reported on the informal meeti ng on Special and Differential Treatment held 
on 27 February and 1 March.  At that meeting, he had recalled the main  developments in the 
Committee’s discussion of the five proposals on special  and differential treatment referred to it in 
August 2004. 
78. In particular, the Chairman had highlighted the following:  
•  the G/SPS/33 procedure and its extension until 2008; 
•  the G/SPS/35 report; 
•  the Committee’s discussion of th e Africa Group’s revisions to its proposal on Article 9.2; 
•  the adoption by the General Council of the pr oposal from a number of small and vulnerable 
economies;  and 
•  Members’ submissions on technical assistance and the paper from the United States on 
Special and Differential Treatment (G/SPS/W/198). 
 79. Egypt had reported on work it had undertaken sinc e the last Committee meeting.  This work 
comprised an analysis of different legal texts dea ling with Special and Differential Treatment and an 
examination of relevant WTO jurisprudence.  This analysis examined the mandatory language 
contained in Article 10.1 of the SPS Agreement with  similar language in different Agreements which 
had been interpreted in the context of WTO dis pute resolution cases.  The paper submitted by Egypt 
was contained in JOB(07)/25.   
80. The key conclusion that had been drawn by Egypt was that even where mandatory language 
was used in special and differential treatment provisions, it was not sufficient to make these 
provisions effective and enforceable.  Such provisions  needed to specify the action to be taken in 
response to developing country needs.  The same wa s also true of the technical assistance provisions 
in the SPS Agreement, which contained best endeav our language and lacked workable or practical 
parameters to get these provisions implemented, comp ared to similar provisions in other agreements.  
In conclusion, Egypt had informed Members that it was working on an analysis of the G/SPS/33 
document and it would present a proposal on this decision in due course. 
81. Colombia and Cuba had welcomed the Egyptian intervention and had requested that this be 
distributed as a document at the formal Committee meeting.   
82. In continuing informal discussions on 1 Ma rch, a number of Members welcomed Egypt's 
proposal and analysis.  Several Members recalled the need to also make progress with respect to the 
Category II proposals already on the table.  Egypt s uggested that informal consultations be held 
among interested Members to advance work on this matter by June. 
83. A number of Members had noted with interest the proposal of Egypt.  Some of them had 
stressed, however, that in contrast to the case of  antidumping, SPS measures were necessary to ensure 
health protection.  Furthermore, they had consid ered that there was little evidence that developing 
countries were make use of the existing provis ions on S&D or requesting special treatment.   G/SPS/R/44 
 Page 19 
 
 
  Nonetheless, such special treatment was regularly provided by developed country Members to 
developing country Members, but not by developi ng countries to each other.  Several Members had 
stressed that they would not support proposals th at changed the balance of rights and obligations 
under the SPS Agreement. 
84. Other Members had noted that the Committee ha d a mandate to review  and make operational 
the S&D provisions of the SPS Agreement, which did not exclude the possibility of revising the text 
of the Agreement.  These Members had stressed, ho wever, that this did not imply creating loopholes 
or exceptions that could result in health risks for Members. 
85. A number of Members had suggested that th e Committee should focus on identifying a 
workable manner to ensure that  special treatment was provided to developing countries without 
prejudicing the right of Members to ensure health protection. 
86. The Chairman had urged Members to make availa ble further proposals, comments or analysis 
they might be preparing as quickly as possible, for consideration by all Members.  He also urged 
interested Members to continue to discuss this  issue among themselves in advance of the June 
meeting. 
87. Following his report on the informal meeting,  the Chairman proposed that the Committee 
keep this issue on its agenda and hold an informal meeting prior to the next regular meeting of the 
Committee.  He invited Members to table new or  revised proposals, and to make known their 
comments or views on proposals. 
(b) Other matters relating to special and differential treatment 
88. There was no discussion of other matters rela ting to special and differential treatment. 
VI. EQUIVALENCE – ARTICLE 4 
(a) Information from Members on their experiences 
89. No Member provided information on experiences related to equivalence.  The Secretariat 
noted that during travel to various Members, it wa s not uncommon that officials made reference to 
various equivalence agreements that had been r eached with other trading partners, and questioned 
why Members were not notifying these to the SPS Co mmittee.  The lack of notifications gave the 
impression that the provisions on equivalence and th e Committee’s guidance were not working, while 
apparently this was not the case.   
90. The representatives of Chile and of Argentina ag reed that equivalence agreements did exist, 
and that the guidance developed by the Committee w as being used.  They suggested that one reason 
Members did not notify these agreements was to  avoid other exporters benefiting from the 
arrangements.  Furthermore, in many cases the noti on of equivalence was applied without any formal 
recognition of equivalence per se , or without calling the bilateral arrangements “equivalence”. They 
agreed, however, that it would be useful for Me mbers to provide information regarding their 
experiences in this area. 
(b) Information from relevant  observer organizations 
91. The representative of the OIE stressed the importance of importing Members making clear the 
health objectives of their measures, and also explaining their reasons for rejecting claims of equivalence of measures (G/SPS/GEN/767).  The OIE was willing to assist Members to reach 
agreements on veterinary equivalence. G/SPS/R/44 
Page 20  
 
  92. The representative of Codex recalled that the Codex had adopted Guidelines for the 
Development of Equivalence of Food Import a nd Export Systems in 1999, and Guidelines on the 
Judgement of Equivalence in 2 003.  Currently, work was underwa y on appendices to this latter 
document to provide further guidance to Members. 
93. The representative of the IPPC reported that the Commission on Phytosanitary Measures 
(CPM) had adopted a standard on equivalence in 2005 (ISPM 24), and had revised the
 Phytosanitary 
principles for the protection of plants and the app lication of phytosanitary measures in international 
trade include the principle of equivalence (ISPM 1).  The IPPC had not received any indications from its members that they were experiencing difficulties in the recognition of the equivalence of phytosanitary measures. 
VII. PEST- OR DISEASE-FREE AREAS - ARTICLE 6 
(a) Chairman's report on the informal meeting on regionalization  
94. The Chairman reported that at the informal meeting on regionalization held on 27 February, 
he had recalled that in October the Committee's di scussions had focused on the revised background 
paper prepared by the Secretariat (G/SPS/GEN/640/ Rev.1).  Several Members had commented on the 
text, but no Member had provided further comment s in writing subsequent to that  meeting. 
95. At the October meeting, several Members had also commented on the way forward.  Some 
Members had thought that the Committee was ready to move towards a decision on the subject while 
other Members disagreed.  The Chairman had encour aged Members to consult informally in small 
groups to try to find a solution.  Some initial cons ultations on the margins of the October meeting had 
not succeeded in resolving the differences. 
96. At the informal meeting on 27 February, a num ber of Members had reported that informal 
small group meetings had c ontinued.  Members were engaging on the subject in good faith, and hoped 
to be able to soon reach an agreement acceptable to all. 
97. One Member had noted that considerable progress had already been made on this subject, and 
that the Secretariat background paper had served as a good basis for discussions.  Another Member 
had emphasized that regionalization was of high priority and had expressed the hope that the 
Committee would reach a decision soon.   
98. One Member had stressed that regionali zation was a standing item on the Committee's 
agenda, although frequently issues related to disease-  or pest-free areas were  raised under other 
agenda items.  This delegation had encouraged Memb ers to make use of the agenda item dedicated to 
regionalization.   
99. The representative of the IPPC had remi nded the Committee that the Commission on 
Phytosanitary Measures (CPM) was due to have its second meeting in March.  At that meeting, a 
number of standards would be up for adoption, incl uding the draft standard on recognition of pest-free 
areas and areas of low pest prevalence.  Over 100 countries had commented on this draft standard.  
The representative of the IPPC had furthermore recalled that he had informed the Committee of a 
survey on pest-free areas that had been undertaken.  Th e results of this survey showed that pest-free 
areas were a tool that was being widely used for different pests and crops.  At the upcoming meeting, 
the CPM would also decide whether a working gro up should go ahead with a feasibility study on 
international recognition of pest-free areas. 
100. At the end of the informal meeting, the Committe e had indicated that an informal meeting in 
June would be useful to try to advance the discussions of this issue.  G/SPS/R/44 
 Page 21 
 
 
  101. Following the Chairman's oral report, the representative of New Zealand reported on the 
progress that had been made in informal consulta tions among a group of 14 Members.  Their efforts 
had focussed on seeking more certainty and clarity regarding process, information requirements, and how long it took to begin and to complete request s for regionalization.  The working group agreed 
that the overall objective was to improve predic tability and trust in trade through managing 
expectations by use of transparency and good regulat ory practices.  Members wished to find a process 
that they could consistently and realistically meet  as both importers and exporters.  Considerable 
progress had been made regarding process and info rmation requirements, and the informal group 
planned to meet again immediately prior to the June meeting of the Committee. 
102. The representatives of Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Colombia and Egypt stressed the need for the 
Committee to move ahead as rapidly as possible on this issue.  They expressed the hope that the 
informal consultations would result in a draft text  for consideration by the Committee at its next 
regular meeting.   
103. The representative of Japan noted that the Co mmittee should wait for the OIE and IPPC to 
complete their work in this area, in order to a void duplication.  He suggested that Members should 
have a coherent view on the issue in the WTO, OIE and IPPC. 
104. The Chairman welcomed indications of progr ess and suggested that interested Members 
continue to work together to reach consensus on a proposal that could be considered by the SPS 
Committee at an informal meeting immediately prior to the June meeting of the Committee. 
(b) Information from Members on their experiences  
105. The representative of Chile noted that many Members provided informa tion relating to pest- 
or disease-free situations under other agenda items, rath er than under this item.  He noted that almost 
half of the issues raised under Agenda Item 2 "Activities of Members" and as "Specific Trade 
Concerns" under Agenda Item 3 dealt with pest- or disease-free areas.  It would facilitate the compilation of information if Members reported on these issues under this agenda item instead. 
(c) Information from relevant  observer organizations  
106. The representative of the OIE stressed the im portance of this issue for the OIE, who 
considered it as the identification of pest- or  disease-free populations.  The SPS Committee should not 
wait for OIE to complete its work on regionalizati on, as this work was constantly being revised, the 
rewriting of the chapters for several diseases w as underway and such work would continue 
indefinitely.  The chapter of the Terrestrial Anim al Health Code on regionalization also dealt with 
compartmentalization,  that is, the concept of defining a population as pest- or disease-free on the 
basis of management practices, not geographical features.  Surveillance was important for both 
regionalization and compartmentalization.  Both of  these approaches were particularly important for 
diseases such as FMD, classical swin e fever, avian influenza, and Newcastle disease.  The OIE hoped 
to present some practical guidelines for use by governments during the course of 2007.  
107. The representative of the IPPC noted that to da te the IPPC had developed several relevant 
generic standards, but was now developing standa rds for specific pests.  In 2006, the CPM had  
approved ISPM 26 on fruit flies.  This year, the CP M would be considering ad option of a standard on 
the recognition of pest-free areas.  The IPPC was undertaking a feasibility study regarding formal 
international recognition of pest-free status. 
108. The representative of Chile stressed that th e work of the SPS Committee should not be 
delayed by the work of the OIE and IPPC.  The i ssue of compartmentalization was also of relevance 
to the work of Codex.  The representative of Japan clarified that his comments had referred to the OIE G/SPS/R/44 
Page 22  
 
  planned discussion of biosecurity plans in zoning and compartmenta lization at its meeting in May 
2007.  The representative of Colombia stressed the n eed for better coordination at the national level 
between delegates involved in the SPS Committee and those involved in the work of the OIE and IPPC.  The representative of Peru noted that the SPS Committee should advance with it work on 
administrative guidance, for which it was not nec essary to wait for further advancements in the 
technical work by the OIE and IPPC. 
VIII.  TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND COOPERATION  
(a) Information from the Secretariat 
109. The Secretariat noted that document G/SPS/GE N/521/Rev.2 provided information regarding 
the SPS-related technical assistance activities of th e WTO Secretariat since 1994.  In 2006, the 
Secretariat had delivered three (sub)regional work shops and four national seminars, and had also 
participated in training activities organized by Sweden, Japan and by UNEP.  Two of the national seminars, as well as a regional seminar held in Colombia, had taken place since the last meeting of the SPS Committee.  In addition, the second speciali zed trade policy course on the SPS Agreement had 
been held, in English, in October-November 2006. 
110. For 2007, the Secretariat planned to undertak e three (sub)regional workshops.  One had 
already been held in Mali, for francophone African countries and had included the participation of the 
UEMOA and ECOWAS secretariats.  A regional semi nar for the SAARC countries would be held in 
India in April, and one for Anglophone African countries was scheduled for later in the year in Zambia.  Requests for national seminars had been submitted by five Members (Benin, El Salvador, 
Indonesia, Nicaragua and Sri Lanka), and a national seminar in Mexico that had been postponed from 
2006 had been held in February 2007.   In addition, the Secretariat had been requested by the Inter-
American Development Bank to organize regional semi nars in the Caribbean and in South America.  
A third specialized trade policy course on the SPS Ag reement would be held, in French, in Geneva 
immediately following the October 2007 meeting of the SPS Committee. 
111. In addition, the Secretariat had further collabor ated with the OECD to improve and complete 
the information on SPS-related capacity building th at was reported in the OECD Trade Capacity 
Building Database.  The preliminary information and evaluation of technical assistance provided in 
document G/SPS/GEN/726 would be updated and revised.  The Secretariat also drew attention to the 
Aid for Trade initiative of the WTO, and how  the work relating to SPS capacity building 
complemented this initiative.  In addition, initiatives to foster the par ticipation of developing countries 
in the work of the SPS Committee,  such as the SPS for the Americas programme of IICA, had shown 
significant benefits, and the United Kingdom was considering a similar programme for the SADC 
countries. 
112. Finally, the Secretariat drew attention to  the updated report on the STDF, contained in 
document G/SPS/GEN/748.  The Medium Term Strategy  for the STDF had been adopted by its Policy 
Committee in December 2006.  This would result in  a greater focus on effectiveness of technical 
assistance and improved coordination among donors.  Although the STDF would continue to fund a 
limited number of capacity-building projects, the focus would be more on the funding of project preparation grants.  Regional cons ultations would be organized to identify best practices in SPS-
related capacity building, with th e first consultations to be held in Central America and East Africa 
before the end of 2007.  The STDF Working Group would meet on 2 March to consider requests for 
funding of projects and project preparation grants.  Recent contributions had been received from the 
European Communities, Denmark, Sweden and the United States, however total contributions were 
still short of the targeted US $5 million per year.  G/SPS/R/44 
 Page 23 
 
 
  113. The Secretariat also noted that invitations for the next specialized SPS trade policy course, to 
be held from 16 October through 2 November 2007, w ould be issued before the next meeting of the 
SPS Committee.  This course would be given in French , and participants were expected to already be 
familiar with the SPS Agreement and be working in areas related to its implementation.  The course 
was designed to be very interactive,  and participants would be expect ed to develop an action plan to 
implement after the course.  The Secretariat was also planning to hold a follow-up session to the 
specialized course held in 2006 prior to the June meeting.  At this follow-up session, participants 
would have the opportunity to report on th e implementation of their action plans. 
114. A number of Members thanked the Secretaria t for its regional and national seminars, and 
noted that participants in these activities found them to be very informative.  Some Members also 
expressed their appreciation for the specialized cour se, which had notably improved the participation 
by Members in terms of their interventio ns and the documents they submitted.   
115. In response to a question, the Secretariat noted the difficulty of evaluating the effectiveness of 
the training activities which it provided on improvi ng the implementation by Members of the SPS 
Agreement.  One measurement could be considerat ion of the number and quality of notifications 
submitted by Members, where there was a noticeable  increase in particular following activities which 
focussed on transparency.  Participation by Memb ers in the work of the SPS Committee was another 
possible measure, although participation was also  dependent on national budgetary resources and 
priorities.  With respect to the specialized course s, participants were required to implement some 
national activity, and to report on this.  In terms of the continuation of the specialized courses, the 
Secretariat indicated that it would seek to contin ue this training, as it was very rewarding and 
participants considered it very useful.  However, these courses were extremely resource intensive, not 
only financially but also in terms of WTO staff ti me.  Their continuation was dependent on Members, 
who approved the budget and annual technical assistance plan for the WTO.  Members who were 
interested in seeing the specialized courses continue  should make their views known to the Institute 
for Training and Technical Cooperation. 
(b) Information from Members 
116. The representative of the European Commun ities reported on several new initiatives for SPS 
capacity building.  One programme was providing 2 million Euro to assist countries on avian influenza measures and preparedness plans.  In a ddition, a 30 million Euro fund had been created to 
assist developing countries meet the requirements of  the new EC food and feed  control regulations.  
Although there appeared to be widespread fears th at these new requirements would negatively affect 
trade, the requirements had been in effect since ea rly 2006 without creating serious difficulties.  The 
new fund had been developed in cooperation with AC P countries and was specifically targeted to their 
needs.  Another 3.5 million Euro fund had been est ablished for the African Un ion to help assist the 
effective participation of African officials in the work of the relevant inte rnational standard-setting 
bodies and of the SPS Committee.  The African Union would decide what activities would be funded.  
In addition, 30 million Euros of residual money from the previous deve lopment fund remained 
available for direct aid in the SPS area, depending on the priorities of applicant countries.  Finally, the 
representative of the European Communities drew a ttention to an information sheet available to 
delegates which summarized various SPS-related tr aining programmes that would be conducted in 
developing countries by EC experts. 
117. The representative of Canada drew attenti on to document G/SPS/GEN/765, which contained 
information on Canada’s SPS-related technical assi stance activities in 2006.  Canada had undertaken 
25 projects, as well as provided contributions to the STDF. G/SPS/R/44 
Page 24  
 
  (c) Information from observers 
118. The representative of the IPPC noted that document G/SPS/GEN/756 provided information 
regarding the technical assistance activities of the IPPC secretariat and the FAO.  Since the last meeting of the SPS Committee, the IPPC had primaril y been involved with assisting members prepare 
for the meeting of the Commission on Phytosanita ry Measures in March 2007.  The document also 
contained information on FAO gene ral capacity building programmes. 
119. The representative of IICA indicated th at document G/SPS/GEN/753 reported on recent 
actions undertaken by IICA to assist its members implement SPS measures. 
120. The representative of the OIE drew attention to the report on OIE activities (G/SPS/GEN/758) 
and in particular the work on the development of  the Veterinary Performance, Vision and Strategy 
evaluation tool (PVS).  This was designed, in co llaboration with IICA, to facilitate the improvement 
of national veterinary services.  
121. A number of Members expressed their gratitude to  IICA for its assistance in the strengthening 
of national SPS committees, assisting Members im plement the transparency provisions of the SPS 
Agreement, and improve national c oordination.  The Initiative for the Americas, and the contributions 
of the USDA, OIRSA and others had made significant differences for many Members. 
IX. MATTERS OF INTEREST ARISING FROM THE WORK OF OBSERVER 
ORGANIZATIONS 
122. The representative of the Codex drew attention to the finalization of various texts to be 
submitted to the Codex Alimentarius Commission se ssion in Rome, on 2-7 July 2007, immediately 
following the next meeting of the SPS Committee (G/SPS/GEN/747).  These included:  the revised 
standard for infant formula and formula for special  medical purposes for infants;  finalized guidelines 
for generic food safety certificates;  principles for the conduct of microbiological risk management;  
standards on eggs and egg products ;  and general principles of food hygiene for the control of Listeria 
monocytogenes  in foods.   
123. The representative of IPPC provided an up date on the IPPC standard setting work 
programme, and indicated that document G/SPS/GEN/754 listed all standards adopted to date, as well 
as the technical panels that had been establis hed,.  Document G/SPS/GEN/757 identified the 
international phytosanitary standards proposed for adoption at the next CPM meeting at the end of 
March 2007, as well as other issues to be considered at  that meeting.  The IPPC had just undergone an 
external evaluation, which involved a questionnair e completed by 90 countries.  A large section of 
this questionnaire focussed on the development of  standards which might be of use to the SPS 
Committee.  An important task this year was the establishment of a working group to look at 
compliance, to identify areas were members might have difficulties applying IPPC standards and to 
determine what mechanisms could rectify these problems.  A good example of this was ISPM 15, where international workshops had been held after countries indicated they were having difficulties in 
complying with the standard. 
124. The representative of the OIE highlighted th e important initiative taken on governance of 
veterinary services.  The need for further developm ent of competent authorities capacities with regard 
to aquatic animal diseases had been identified.  In terms of the OIE's normative work, they had 
reviewed the procedures for official recognition of  freedom from four diseases, and changes would be 
submitted for approval by the International Committee in May.  In addition, the BSE standard was 
being revised in light of scientific documentation.   The proposal was to permit trade in gelatine 
without taking into account the BSE status of th e supplying country, if it were produced from animals 
that had passed ante and post mortem inspections.  This was in essence a recognition of equivalence.   G/SPS/R/44 
 Page 25 
 
 
  The representative indicated that she would be ple ased to provide a presentation on the OIE's risk 
management approach for BSE, as requested by United States.  Avian influenza had caused 
considerable trade disruptions, and there were many complaints about bans that had been imposed in 
response to cases of avian influenza in zoos and in wild  birds.  These restrictions were not in line with 
the OIE standards.  The imposition of unjustified trade bans discouraged countries from being 
transparent and notifying disease out breaks.  (See also G/SPS/GEN/758.) 
125. The representative of IICA recalled that he had already reported on the relevant activities of 
IICA during the discussions on technical assistance (G/SPS/GEN/753).  
126. The representative of OIRSA noted how the work of his organization supported the work of 
the OIE (G/SPS/GEN/762).  OIRSA was working on th e eradication of classical swine fever, which 
was almost totally under control in Central America.   Other activities related to avian influenza, in 
cooperation with an IICA project on avian safety.  OIRSA activities had also included work on food 
safety, good manufacturing practices and HACCP, a nd work with the WHO on the development of 
food laws.  OIRSA was preparing simulation exercises in several countries with respect to highly 
pathogenic avian influenza. 
X. ISSUES ARISING FROM THE REVIEW  OF THE OPERATION OF THE SPS 
AGREEMENT 
(a) Chairman's report 
127. The Chairman reported that at the informal meeting on issues arising from the Second Review 
of the operation and implementation of the SPS Agreement on 27 February  he had recalled that at the 
October meeting of the Committee, the Secretariat had been requested to produce a revised paper 
regarding possible "next steps" the Committee could take to move ahead on these issues.  This paper 
had been provided to Members in an attachment to the fax convening the informal meeting, as 
Job(07)/14. 
128. In presenting the paper, the Secretariat had noted  that to respond to Members' concerns that 
no issue be overlooked, the revision looked at each  of the recommendations made by the Committee 
in the report of the Review (G/SPS/36).  For each of  the issues identified in the Review, the revised 
paper had noted where the Committee was already a ddressing the issue – for example as part of its 
regular agenda, or through dedicated informal meetings.  This was the case for about half of the issues 
arising from the Review, including transparency, S&D, technical assistance and regionalization.  The 
remaining issues, however, had not as yet been systematically addressed by the Committee, and the Secretariat paper had suggested some possible actions on these. 
129. Several Members had noted that although some issues were otherwise addressed by the 
Committee, this did not mean that there had been sufficient consideration of these.  For example, 
although the Committee had developed guidelines rega rding implementation of Articles 4 and 5.5, 
there was little information regarding the extent to  which Members' followed these guidelines.  Other 
Members had stressed that priority should be given to completing the Committee's work on regionalization.  A number of Members had indicat ed that, given the number of issues arising from 
the Review, the Committee needed to agree on a methodology for addressing these, including determining some priorities for its future work. 
130. Many Members had suggested that the Comm ittee should first address the issue of 
cooperation with the standard-setting bodies and clarif ication of the respective roles of these and the 
SPS Committee, as well as the issue of enhancing the use of ad hoc consultations for resolving trade 
difficulties.  They had noted that the relationship w ith the three sister organizations was relevant for 
the consideration of a number of other issues, in cluding regionalization and monitoring of the use of G/SPS/R/44 
Page 26  
 
  international standards.  It was important to know whether the resources dedicated to developing 
international standards were warranted in terms of use of these standards.   
131. In terms of ad hoc consultations, several Me mbers had said it would be useful to have 
information from the OIE and IPPC regarding th eir respective procedures for assisting in the 
resolution of differences, as well as more info rmation regarding the use of the SPS Committee 
Chairman's "good offices" and the discussions in the context of the non-agricultural market access 
negotiations (NAMA) on horizontal mechanisms to fac ilitate resolution of non-tariff barrier disputes.  
One delegation had noted that ad hoc consultations  also included the procedures for considering 
specific trade concerns.   
132. Other Members had noted the importance of  the Committee continuing to focus on 
improvements to the implementation of the transpar ency provisions, as well as on the issue of undue 
delays.  With respect to the latter, several delega tes had suggested that it would be most useful for 
Members to provide information on their experiences.   
133. Another Member had stressed the importance of further work by the Committee on special 
and differential treatment and technical assistance.  Of particular concern was the non-use of the 
procedure for Members to identify their need for special and differential treatment or technical 
assistance, developed by the Committee in G/SPS/33.  With respect to technical assistance, although 
there was a lot of information regarding the larg e volumes of SPS-related projects, the Committee had 
barely begun consideration of how to make SPS-rela ted technical assistance effective.  The STDF was 
recognized as a good initiative in this regard, but more work was needed. 
134. On a number of the issues arising from the Review - including the relationship between 
certain articles of the SPS Agreement, good regula tory practices and Anne x C - delegates had no 
specific comments.  With regard to the proposed clar ification of certain terms in the Agreement, it 
was suggested that this was not a priority matter at this time. 
135. In concluding the informal meeting, the Chai rman had noted that there were four common 
views:  (1) it was too difficult for the Committee to address all issues at the same time and with the 
same depth;  (2) there was therefore a need to pr ioritize the consideration of issues;  (3) for those 
issues not identified for immediate further work, it would be useful for Members to exchange information on their experiences and for the Secretar iat to provide some background information;  and 
(4) Members who wished to see further considerati on of issues they had raised needed to submit 
specific proposals or documents on these, and provi de information regarding their experiences. 
136. Based on the discussions, the Chairman had suggested that the Committee agree on the 
following next steps, without prejudice to the consideration of other issues arising from the Review: 
(a) The Committee continue its discussions on tr ansparency, noting that an informal 
meeting was to be held on this issue in June; 
(b) The Committee continue its discussions on regionalization, also noting that an 
informal meeting was to be held on this issue in June; 
(c) The Committee also continue its discussions  on S&D, including at an informal 
meeting to be held on this issue in June , with a focus on the non-use of G/SPS/33 and 
on other points that might arise from the informal discussions on S&D; 
(d) The Committee consider technical assistance as part of its regular agenda in June, 
with a focus on evaluating the effectiv eness of technical assistance, based on 
information provided by Members;  G/SPS/R/44 
 Page 27 
 
 
  (e) The Committee address the issue of ad hoc c onsultations, inviting the OIE, IPPC and 
Codex to provide information regarding th eir respective mechanisms for resolving 
trade problems among Members at the June meeting;  and 
(f) The Committee address the relationship between the SPS Committee and the three 
sister organizations in June, inviting Me mbers to present proposals or papers with 
respect to different aspects of this relati onship, including the use of international 
standards.  
137. In commenting on the Chairman's oral report, the representative of the United States indicated 
that her delegation was encouraged by the Committee' s deliberations and the identification of several 
areas for further work.  The United States reitera ted its interest in providing assistance in the 
preparation of the special meeting on transparency, an issue which they considered to be of high 
priority.  The Committee should consider what fu rther work on transparency would be useful 
following the special meeting.  The United States would also welcome information from the Codex, 
IPPC and OIE relating to the issue of ad hoc cons ultations and the resolution of trade problems, as 
well as a closer examination of the relationship between the SPS Committee and these organizations.  
For example, it would be useful to have a step-by-step explanation of the process of obtaining 
recognition of BSE freedom from the OIE. 
XI. MONITORING OF THE USE OF INTERNATIONAL STANDARDS 
138. There was no discussion under this agenda item. 
XII. OBSERVERS – REQUESTS FOR OBSERVER STATUS 
139. The Committee agreed to invite those organiza tions which had been granted observer status 
on an ad hoc, meeting-by-meeting basis to participate in its next meeting.  The Committee also 
decided to invite all observer organizations to  participate in its next informal meetings. 
140. The Committee was unable to reach any decision with regard to the requests for observer 
status from the Office International de la Vigne et  du Vin (OIV), from the Asian and Pacific Coconut 
Community (APCC), and from the Convention on Biodive rsity (CBD), and agreed to revert to this 
matter at its next meeting.   
XIII.  ELECTION OF CHAIRPERSON 
141. The Chairman reported that the Chairman of th e Council for Trade in Goods had been not yet 
concluded his consultations on a sl ate of names for appointment as chairpersons to the subsidiary 
bodies of the Council for Trade in Goods in accordance with the estab lished Guidelines for 
Appointment of Officers to WTO bodies (contained in document WT/L/31).  As such, he suggested 
that the election of the Chairperson of the Co mmittee be postponed until the next Committee meeting 
in June, and that the election take place at the time  of the first informal Committee meeting, with the 
Committee briefly switching to formal mode to acclaim its new Chairperson. 
XIV.  OTHER BUSINESS 
Guatemala’s restrictions on imports of poultry meat – Concerns of Mexico (no. 210, 
G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.7)  
142. The representative of Mexico recalled that he  had previously raised concerns regarding 
Guatemala’s restrictions on imports of poultry pr oducts and eggs from Mexico.  Despite several 
bilateral meetings seeking an end to Guatemala’s restrictions imposed due to low pathogenic avian 
influenza, there had still been no response from the Guatemalan Ministry of Agriculture. These G/SPS/R/44 
Page 28  
 
  restrictions were not in line with the OIE Code .  Mexico had requested that Guatemala undertake 
verification visits, but had not received a satisfactory reply. 
143. The representative of Guatemala confirmed that following technical meetings and discussions 
of the sanitary status of both countries, his country ha d agreed to undertake visits to check controls in 
Mexico.  Unfortunately, due to budgetary constrai nts, these visits had not yet been possible, and 
further delays had occurred due to changes in th e head of the relevant department.  However, 
Guatemala remained committed to resolving this issue. 
Bolivia’s slaughter of imported cattle – Concern s of Mexico (no. 205, G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.7) 
 
144. The representative of Mexico recalled that th is problem had originated when Mexican 
breeding cattle had been imported into Bolivia for par ticipation in a trade fair.  Although Bolivia had 
issued permits for the entry of these animals, upon th eir arrival Bolivia had refused entry and ordered 
that the cattle to be sent back to Mexico.  This  was not possible because FMD existed in Bolivia but 
not in Mexico.  Bolivia had falsely claimed that  Mexico was a high risk source of BSE, and had 
slaughtered the cattle.  Although the Supreme Court of  Santa Cruz in Bolivia had ordered payment of 
reparations to Mexico, this not yet occurred. 
145. The representative of Bolivia indicated that when  the 25 head of cattle had arrived in Bolivia, 
his authorities realized that the procedures for this  type of importation had not been properly applied 
(G/SPS/GEN/768).  Before such impor tation could be permitted, Bolivia  needed to complete a risk 
assessment for BSE, but this was not possible as not enough information had been provided by 
Mexico, nor was there sufficient time to complete the analysis.  Bolivia had proposed returning the 
cattle to Mexico, as they had in fact arrived in an FMD-free area, but when  Mexico refused to accept 
them, the cattle were slaughtered.  Recognition of Mexico as BSE free needed to be referred to the 
OIE.  Bolivia noted that the company involved had not followed up on the judgement of the court.  
Information from the Philippines on avian influenza and foot and mouth disease 
 
146. The representative of the Philippines reported that his country was free of avian influenza.  
All tests of blood from samples of native birds were  negative.  Because of this status, the Philippines 
continued to export chicken produc ts.  To maintain its freedom from avian influenza, different 
measures had been imposed.  These included temporary bans;  enforcement of the wildlife act, with no imports of birds permitted from areas with av ian influenza;  preventive measures in humans, 
including vaccination of poultry workers;  upgradin g national and regional laboratories;  creation of 
national, provincial and municipal taskforces;   the development of emergency response plans;  
awareness campaigns;  the establishment of biosecurity  control points;  surveillance and prevention at 
air and sea ports;  and the establishment of a compar tmentalized poultry zone.  With respect to FMD, 
a number of regions had been recognized as free.  Measures to maintain this status included:  
surveillance and monitoring of movement of animal s;  quarantine checkpoints;  and twice-yearly sero-
surveillance. 
Turkey  - outbreak of avian influenza 
 
147. The representative of Turkey reported that re cent outbreaks of avian influenza in some 
regions were limited in both size of infected areas and the number of reported cases compared to last year.  A first outbreak had been reported on 8 Februa ry 2007 in south-eastern Anatolia.  Poultry in the 
area had been slaughtered, and measures taken to pr event the further spread of the virus, including 
disinfection, quarantine, training and tes ting.  There had been no human cases.   G/SPS/R/44 
 Page 29 
 
 
  Panama – Notification system for food product imports 
 
148. The representative of Panama indicated that his country had introduced a notification system 
for food product imports.  The necessary forms coul d be accessed via internet from anywhere in the 
world, with free and expeditious processing availa ble 24 hours per day, seven days a week.  This 
automated system would reduce human error while ge nerating historic records.  It also facilitated 
consultation of notifications in the database, and re cognition of products by inspectors.  This initiative 
by the Panamanian Food Safety Aut hority should improve trade relations.   
Bolivia – outbreak of FMD 
 
149. The representative of Bolivia reported that  an FMD outbreak had occurred following 
confirmation of a suspected case on 24 January 2007.  The national emergency system had 
immediately been activated.  The OIE and PANA FTOSA had been notified .  The center of the 
outbreak was in Santa Cruz, where there had been no outbreaks in the past three years.  The source of 
the outbreak was being investigated.  The measures taken had included:  stra tegic vaccinations in 
buffer zones;  quarantine and  restrictions on move ments of susceptible animals;  reinforcement of 
control stations;  training and communication.  Boliv ia's priority was to regain its FMD-free status 
with vaccination.   
150. The representative of Paraguay indicated that his country had immediately temporarily 
prohibited FMD-susceptible animal product imports from Bolivia to safeguard Paraguay's free status 
with vaccination.  
XV. DATE  AND AGENDA FOR NEXT MEETING 
151. The next meeting of the Committee is tentatively scheduled for 27-28 June 2007, with 
informal meetings scheduled for 25 –26 June 2007.   The relevant deadlines for submitting items for 
the agenda are as follows: 
(i) For identifying new issues for consideration under the monitoring procedure, AND 
for requesting that items be put on the agenda :  14 June 2007  
(ii) For the distribution of the airgram:  15 June 2007  
152. The Committee agreed on the attached provi sional agenda for its next meeting. 
153. The Chairman stated that it had been a re warding experience to chair the SPS Committee and 
thanked Members for the support which they had give n to him.  A number of Members took the floor 
to express their appreciation to the Chairman, on beha lf of the Committee, for his dedication and hard 
work in the past year. 
 G/SPS/R/44 
Page 30  
 
   
PROPOSED AGENDA FOR MEETING OF 27-28 JUNE 2007 
 
 
1. Adoption of the agenda 
2. Election of the Chairperson 
3. Activities of Members 
4. Specific trade concerns 
(a) New issues 
(b) Issues previously raised 
(c) Consideration of specific notifications received 
(d) Information on resolution of issues in G/SPS/GEN/204/Rev.7 
5. Operation of transparency provisions 
 (a) Report on the informal meeting 
6. Implementation of special and differential treatment 
(a) Report on informal meeting 
(b) Use of G/SPS/33 
(c) Other matters relating to S&D 
7. Equivalence – Article 4 
(a) Information from Members on their experiences 
(b) Information from relevant  observer organizations 
8. Pest- and Disease-free areas – Article 6 
(a) Report on informal meeting 
(b) Information from Members on their experiences 
(c) Information from relevant  observer organizations 
9. Technical assistance and cooperation 
(a) Information from the Secretariat 
(b) Information from Members 
(c) Information from observers 
(d) Best practices for SPS technical assistance 
10. Issues arising from the Review 
(a) Use of ad hoc consultations 
(i) information from standard-setting bodies 
(ii) practice under the SPS Agreement 
(b) Relationship between the SPS Committee and Codex, OIE, IPPC 
11. Concerns with private and commercial standards  G/SPS/R/44 
 Page 31 
 
 
  12. Monitoring of the use of international standards 
(a) New issues 
(b) Issues previously raised 
(c) Adoption of annual report 
13. Matters of interest arising from th e work of observer organizations 
14. Calendar of meetings in 2008 
15. Observers – Request for observer status 
16. Other business 
17. Date and agenda of next meeting. 
__________